linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][V4] Add reboot_pid_ns to handle the reboot syscall

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20111215140028.e1b8a6a7.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Thu, 15 Dec 2011 14:00:28 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...e.fr>,
	serge.hallyn@...onical.com, containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	gkurz@...ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	mtk.manpages@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH][V4] Add reboot_pid_ns to handle the reboot syscall

On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 20:17:39 +0100
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:

> > It would be
> > better to do
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_PID_NS
> > extern void pidns_handle_reboot(int cmd);
> > #else
> > static inline void pidns_handle_reboot(int cmd)
> > {
> > }
> > #endif
> 
> Can't resist.
> 
> Why the kernel always prefers to do it this way, adding the ugly
> do-nothing inlines?
> 
> Isn't it better to simply call pidns_handle_reboot(cmd) under
> CONFIG_PID_NS in sys_reboot() ?
> 
> 	#ifdef CONFIG_PID_NS
> 	if (task_active_pid_ns(current) != &init_pid_ns)
> 		return reboot_pid_ns(cmd);
> 	#endif

Imagine what the code would look like if we took all the existing empty
inline stubs and replaced them with #if/#else/#endif.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/